British made motors take over The Mall – Top Gear
By John Kananghinis
With the demise of the Australian car manufacturing industry there has been hysteria at the prospect that all Australian manufacturing is doomed.
This is clearly not true. What is true is that our high input and labour costs, combined with our relatively small and yet crowded market do not allow us to compete in the manufacture of large volume , highly competitive, relatively low margin consumer products, such as the average car or white goods.
However what we can do is design and manufacture high value vehicle components, niche vehicle modifications, and complete special purpose vehicles.
A little while ago Top Gear took on the myth that the British car industry is dead – this footage clearly shows that they debunked that idea.
Admittedly the Brits do have a slightly larger market and geographic proximity to many more consumers, not to mention Japanese, German and Indian money behind many of their mass or luxury market cars, but the point to be made is much the same.
All industries go through transitions from the original business model to the one that suits the times. If they don’t they simply die. No amount of tax-payer subsidy will change that.
Well, you could try, but eventually you would end up with the Soviet era shoe factory that measured success in production units only and not sales. Consequently they produced millions of perfectly reasonable shoes, only in one style and in one size and only for left feet. Job done!
Even the recent National Commission of Audit further confirmed that trying to pick winners is ultimately not a sustainable economic setting. Industry assistance should be the exception not the rule with a heavy bias to supporting R&D rather than bolstering unsustainable markets.
We do make a lot of technical auto type stuff in this country and very successfully. We just don’t tell anyone about it, or more to the point we spend all of our effort (certainly all of the news media effort) on looking backwards and maximising the doom factor. That makes for much more arresting headlines.
Almost all component manufacturers providing parts to Ford, GMH and Toyota have had a great deal of notice that local vehicle manufacture could well cease. Most will have been working for some time on diversification and often with considerable success. Of course others may have simply made the valid business decision to shut up shop when supply of components for local manufacture are no longer needed.
However let’s name just a very few of the automotive thingies we do make, and will most likely continue making well past the closure of the traditional car manufacturing plants.
Motorhomes: Brands such as Jayco, Trakka, Apollo, Avida, Suncamper, Cruisin’ and more, many exported to New Zealand and other markets.
Military vehicles: The Australian designed and built Bushmaster troop carrier is in operation with the military of the following nations, Australia, Great Britain, The Neatherlands, Japan, Indonesia and Jamaica.
Trucks: Kenworth, Volvo, IVECO and CAT all build a range of heavy trucks in Australia.
Earth moving and agricultural machinery: From diggers to harvesters to specialty machines for uniquely Australian conditions.
Buses: Most buses and tour couches in Australia are still body-built locally on imported chassis.
Emergency Vehicles: From ambulances to fire trucks to off-road rescue vehicles designed and built in Australia on locally produced and imported chassis, the vast majority of our emergency vehicles are largely Australian built.
Components, Design and R&D: Even the retreating mainline vehicle manufacturers have indicated that due to the specialist skills developed they will be keeping large sections of their local R&D and design capabilities. Automotive component makers of all sorts will continue to provide high value parts for many years to come.
Australia also makes trams, train carriages, truck trailers and even a whole lot of aircraft parts for the latest military and commercial planes built both in Europe and the USA.
The lesson is clear.
If you have a good news story to tell there is a willing audience and very often a willing partner in State and Federal Government to help you tell it. However, you need to take the lead in getting the story out there.
The bad news stories sell themselves. Good news needs skilful packaging and presenting. The resulting positive impact on companies and workers, let alone the broader community, is worth making the effort.
As part of a business supporting communication strategy, ICG has helped many companies make the most of their good news. If you have good news there is no point hiding it, take the opportunity to add to a collective positivity index.
JK
Sorry, not sorryJune 21, 2023 - 1:27 pm
Data Breaches – It’s not if. It’s when!October 4, 2022 - 11:52 am
You will be accountable, but we won’t.May 19, 2021 - 3:14 pm
An Impossible Standard to Meet – or – Nobody Expects The Spanish InquisitionMay 19, 2021 - 3:11 pm
The rise of the echo chamberDecember 2, 2020 - 10:26 pm
The future of Fairfax Newspapers: Fairfax misses the boat
The recent, almost contradictory, leaked emails from Fairfax Newspapers CEO Greg Hywood suggest, on closer analysis, that the once proud mastheads of The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald are at least headed out of print some time in the near future or at worst, headed for the scrap heap.
In May, Hywood reported to staff that “We are no longer a print company… We know that at some time in the future we will be predominantly digital or digital only in our metropolitan markets.”
Recently he tried to retract that statement by saying “Why would Fairfax walk away from print? Over 75 per cent of our revenues are print-based. We have more than 200 titles across Australia and New Zealand.”
A quick unpacking of those two statements show that perhaps they can be reconciled if one adds the fact that 100% of Fairfax revenues have taken a major dive over the past few years and they own a bucket-load of regional, rural and suburban titles but their two Australian flagships continue to bleed.
To this observer it would appear that Fairfax have made at least a couple of strategic errors.
First, they assume they can turn the digital editions of their two leading mastheads into profitable businesses. They are very far from that objective and not really showing any meaningful progress.
Second, they thought the answer to their falling readerships was to become the ‘anti-Rupert’.
News Ltd’s tabloids are known to be right-of-centre and a platform for their owner’s political leanings (or interests more like – but that has always been the case with any media organisation dominated by a founder or family).
Fairfax seem to have figured that they should move to the left in pursuit of the alternate ‘progressive’ readership and jettison balanced, factual reporting for speculative, assertive, cause-and-opinion-based journalism.
Problem is they forget that Rupert has spent decades turning his tabloids (and let’s remember that the term is a synonym for not a very serious paper) into sports and social reporting organs first, with a modicum of daily news thrown in to bolster the Opinion Pieces.
Everyone knows that’s what you get.
The Editors of the daily News Ltd tabloids know only too well their readers mostly read the paper from the back first.
The Age and the SMH used to be positioned as serious broadsheets with in depth analysis and comprehensive impartial coverage of local, national and world affairs.
So exactly how did they figure that becoming tabloid ‘red-rags’ was going to work?
Slavish following of any one party line by a “serious newspaper” is ultimately self-destructive – it’s unbalanced and alienates readers. The tabloids however can thrive on it.
You may ask why are not the left leaning or ‘progressive’ readers not scooping up copies of the hyper –current-government – critical new Fairfax productions?
Perhaps they are overrepresented in the ranks of the media listeners, watchers and readers who seek their news from many diverse and various sources, i.e. online, through social media and the plethora of other ways ‘news’ can be consumed today. Perhaps they haven’t formed the lifelong purchase habits of their more conservative, more working class brethren – or perhaps they just don’t feel the need to put their money where their mouth is.
One thing is for certain, News Ltd, for better or worse, knows how to get their readers in and keep them. And if it is sport as religion that does it, so be it.
On any analysis the picture is not good for Fairfax. Each time I pass the glittering, but abandoned Age print factory in Tullamarine on the way to the airport, I reflect on the imminent demise of another once great brand that totally missed the new technology revolution, which ironically they reported on.
A little while ago that larrikin businessman John Singleton flirted with buying Fairfax’s radio assets and he was arrogantly ignored and dismissed. His blast in return (as reported in The Australian) is not only vintage Singo but also great to see as an example of what people really think when the mask of corporate civility is removed.
Singo made his views clear on the future of the Australian Financial Review, I’m willing to put money (not a lot, mind you) on The Age and SMH not lasting another 18 months in print or perhaps any form.
That would be a sad outcome.
JK
Australia is ideally placed to supply a hungry market emerging to our north
By Angus Nicholls
Read this article at news.com.au
Australian governments across the board have identified primary producers as being exceptionally well placed to capitalise on this dynamic in the markets to our north. But what is the most valuable role that government can play from here on out?
It is our view the macro policy settings are either right, or heading in the right direction. For example, we have, or are working on:
More specifically, Victoria has Food and Fibre Marketing Co-operatives Grants ($5M over 4 years), the Growing Food and Fibre Initiative ($124M over 8 years), an International Engagement Strategy ($50M over 4 years), and the Food to Asia Action Plan.
What we know on the ground is that it is extremely time consuming and expensive for Australian food and fibre producers to establish a sustainable foothold in new offshore markets. Especially where there are substantial cultural differences to be negotiated.
It is here that there is an apparent disconnect between policy settings and achieving aspirational goals for our farmers.
About the only Australian entities that can tough it out establishing new markets are the big players who are doing it anyway.
The challenge therefore is to focus on action that pulls our mid-tier and smaller primary producers into the exporting mix.
These are the businesses that are unlikely to have the resources, or the inclination to dig deep into their pockets and spend considerable time away from their enterprises to make the most of this evolving landscape and government encouragement. They also produce some of the nation’s most sought after products.
So what should be done?
We are of the view that there are plenty of activities that could be undertaken to make it worthwhile for our more boutique and niche suppliers to join this potential gold rush; such as national/state/sectoral branding, educational and cultural exchange, international office and secretarial support, and an event schedule that includes regional showcases of what Australian farmers have to offer the world.
A lot of the big picture work has already been carried out. It is now time to create an environment that sees our primary producers making the most of government policy and international infrastructure to truly incentivise them to take their products to the world.
We see taking this action as translating the bigger picture into stronger regional communities, more employment, and more profitable and innovative businesses. This makes both economic and political sense.
As Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest recently observed, we need a “Team Australia” and access to expertise can help deliver on these aspirations.
In a Victorian context we think that the simplest place to start would be to develop a “road map” for our primary producers that illuminates the path to market. Such a tool could, and should, be taken to our regions to highlight the opportunities and support that exist; as well as demystify the exporting process for those who are not doing it. By increasing the number and diversity of Victorian enterprises exporting, we will see these excellent policies deliver maximum benefit to the State.
Of course this is only the first play in what will be a long and beneficial game. There is plenty more work to be done with one of the major challenges on the government side being to translate theory into practice.
AN
Angus Nicholls has a depth of experience in both the political and commercial worlds.
Over a 15-year career, Angus has been a senior government policy advisor at Federal level, a Councillor at Local government level and the General Manager of one of Australia’s largest seafood businesses.
He has developed a detailed understanding of primary produce, agricultural and industry policy at all levels of government and a deep understanding of local government planning, environmental and community amenity issues.
He is now a Senior Associate and the strategic communications firm Robert Masters & Associates.
Australian manufacturing: good news needs to be told and sold
British made motors take over The Mall – Top Gear
By John Kananghinis
With the demise of the Australian car manufacturing industry there has been hysteria at the prospect that all Australian manufacturing is doomed.
This is clearly not true. What is true is that our high input and labour costs, combined with our relatively small and yet crowded market do not allow us to compete in the manufacture of large volume , highly competitive, relatively low margin consumer products, such as the average car or white goods.
However what we can do is design and manufacture high value vehicle components, niche vehicle modifications, and complete special purpose vehicles.
A little while ago Top Gear took on the myth that the British car industry is dead – this footage clearly shows that they debunked that idea.
Admittedly the Brits do have a slightly larger market and geographic proximity to many more consumers, not to mention Japanese, German and Indian money behind many of their mass or luxury market cars, but the point to be made is much the same.
All industries go through transitions from the original business model to the one that suits the times. If they don’t they simply die. No amount of tax-payer subsidy will change that.
Well, you could try, but eventually you would end up with the Soviet era shoe factory that measured success in production units only and not sales. Consequently they produced millions of perfectly reasonable shoes, only in one style and in one size and only for left feet. Job done!
Even the recent National Commission of Audit further confirmed that trying to pick winners is ultimately not a sustainable economic setting. Industry assistance should be the exception not the rule with a heavy bias to supporting R&D rather than bolstering unsustainable markets.
We do make a lot of technical auto type stuff in this country and very successfully. We just don’t tell anyone about it, or more to the point we spend all of our effort (certainly all of the news media effort) on looking backwards and maximising the doom factor. That makes for much more arresting headlines.
Almost all component manufacturers providing parts to Ford, GMH and Toyota have had a great deal of notice that local vehicle manufacture could well cease. Most will have been working for some time on diversification and often with considerable success. Of course others may have simply made the valid business decision to shut up shop when supply of components for local manufacture are no longer needed.
However let’s name just a very few of the automotive thingies we do make, and will most likely continue making well past the closure of the traditional car manufacturing plants.
Motorhomes: Brands such as Jayco, Trakka, Apollo, Avida, Suncamper, Cruisin’ and more, many exported to New Zealand and other markets.
Military vehicles: The Australian designed and built Bushmaster troop carrier is in operation with the military of the following nations, Australia, Great Britain, The Neatherlands, Japan, Indonesia and Jamaica.
Trucks: Kenworth, Volvo, IVECO and CAT all build a range of heavy trucks in Australia.
Earth moving and agricultural machinery: From diggers to harvesters to specialty machines for uniquely Australian conditions.
Buses: Most buses and tour couches in Australia are still body-built locally on imported chassis.
Emergency Vehicles: From ambulances to fire trucks to off-road rescue vehicles designed and built in Australia on locally produced and imported chassis, the vast majority of our emergency vehicles are largely Australian built.
Components, Design and R&D: Even the retreating mainline vehicle manufacturers have indicated that due to the specialist skills developed they will be keeping large sections of their local R&D and design capabilities. Automotive component makers of all sorts will continue to provide high value parts for many years to come.
Australia also makes trams, train carriages, truck trailers and even a whole lot of aircraft parts for the latest military and commercial planes built both in Europe and the USA.
The lesson is clear.
If you have a good news story to tell there is a willing audience and very often a willing partner in State and Federal Government to help you tell it. However, you need to take the lead in getting the story out there.
The bad news stories sell themselves. Good news needs skilful packaging and presenting. The resulting positive impact on companies and workers, let alone the broader community, is worth making the effort.
As part of a business supporting communication strategy, ICG has helped many companies make the most of their good news. If you have good news there is no point hiding it, take the opportunity to add to a collective positivity index.
JK
Crisis training: would your team stand the pressure test?
By John Kananghinis
Our team recently undertook a live crisis simulation training exercise for a high profile multinational corporation.
Part of our role was to observe the performance under a real-life scenario and note areas for improvement.
The crisis exercise was carefully constructed to put pressure on key staff to respond and act appropriately, closely mirroring a potential operational crisis.
Even though participants knew this was an observed activity, perceived pressure very quickly started to expose issues.
In this case we uncovered both organisational process issues and skill shortcomings on the part of key operatives.
These findings formed the basis of an ongoing training and procedural change program that is being implemented across all relevant divisions.
Some of the issues will be easy for the organisation to address, some will take further training and instruction.
Most significantly for the organisation were the actions that highlighted either a lack of preparedness or lack of skill in dealing with the ‘community’, ‘media’ and ‘essential services’ scenarios.
These were planning and skill-based elements that had previously been assumed as a given for people employed in a range of roles.
Even the most experienced team can gain valuable insights from crisis simulation training.
An effective crisis training exercise allows for the identification of areas where structural and training improvements will ensure far better performance should a real crisis occur.
When conducted in a thorough and cooperative manner, such training exercises have no downside for either the company or the individuals. There are only positive outcomes in terms of lessons learned and identification of processes and skills to be improved.
Pressure testing is not to be feared – it is an essential component of ensuring that a team handles real pressure when needed.
Contact ICG to discuss how we can help prepare your team for the unexpected.
JK